Larry King interviews Ron Paul

How is it a SWAT team can show up at the wrong persons house and kill people and animals? Poor inadequate detective work.

That is worse than a surgeon cutting off the wrong body part.
 
Also, there is no way of telling if they are "truly" a danger to themselves and others until they actually do something "dangerous" to themselves or others.

That is not to say that there cannot be reasonable "warning signs" of impending disaster - but you may rest assured that any "official" list of "warning signs" that might be used to identify someone who may be about to "go postal" will be gradually (or even not so gradually) expanded to include more and increasingly dubious "warning signs" that are not so reasonable at all.

Yep , its a slippery slope, probably should be partly based on 'criminal' activity of some kind .....
 
How is it a SWAT team can show up at the wrong persons house and kill people and animals? Poor inadequate detective work.

That is worse than a surgeon cutting off the wrong body part.

How is it that people can have their house swatted for leaking out information that incriminates places that they used to work?
 
If they are truly a danger to themselves and others they need to be off the street perhaps, taking their
guns won't make them 'safer' to society.


When the guns are gone it will go to car bombs.
Or just cars, you can kill a lot of people with a car.
 
Taking away cars from the good guys isn't going to take them away from the bad guys. The bad guys always get their cars illegally.
You aren't understanding my point.

It is the person and not the weapon that matters, if you take a weapon away from a dangerous person they will get mad and find another weapon.
If a person is violent and dangerous (you would need to prove that completely) then the person needs to be taken away and not the weapon.
 
So what should be done if a person is suspected of being a threat is the person should be surveilled. Wire Tap warrants, surveillance old school kind of detective work not preemptive, stereotyping, gun grabbing, speech stifling, laws.

I don't know. Some problems just don't have solutions.

Bad and/or broken people will do bad and/or broken things.

This is an existential fact of the human condition that those in the utopian "there oughtta be a law!" camp refuse to accept (or even acknowledge).

As the author of an article posted a few days ago by @Anti Federalist says:

As long as we have free speech, gun rights, an aversion to involuntary institutionalization, and a society not yet as neutered as Canada and Europe, we’re gonna have mass shootings. And yes, there will be spikes both real (the March ’98 to May ’99 school shooting wave) and imagined (“Two in one day! It’s statistically impossible!”). As Steve Sailer recently pointed out on Twitter, in the ’60s and ’70s political assassinations seemed to be the new norm in America. Then the spike just tapered off. Sometimes the ebb comes as suddenly as the flow, and if you think you’re in the middle of a flow, it really is best to hold your damn fudge and retain perspective.

That doesn’t mean do nothing. There are all kinds of precautions that can be taken to reduce the carnage caused by mass shootings. But if you’re trying to find “the cause” or “the answer,” you’re wasting your time.

In fact, you might even be approaching the issue from the wrong perspective. You’re searching for the bad things about this country that create mass shooters. Perhaps instead you should be considering the possibility that mass shootings are actually by-products of the good things about the U.S.—gun rights, free speech, and a system that favors individual freedom over public safety when it comes to mental health.

You believe in utopia? Go be a communist. In the real world, no society is perfect and you have to accept the bad with the good. It’s like the song “Pennies From Heaven.” Rain is the price we pay to have flowers, so don’t start building an ark just because we got two cloudbursts in one day. Mass shootings are still rare, and violent crime in general is down across the board in the U.S.
 
Last edited:
I don't know. Some problems just don't have solutions.

Bad and/or broken people will do bad and/or broken things.

This is an existential fact of the human condition that those in the utopian "there oughtta be a law!" crowd refuse to accept (or even acknowledge).

As the author of an article posted a few days ago by @Anti Federalist says:
There is no solution but there is a treatment.

MORE GUNS.

If most shooters were confronted and taken out by an armed good guy before they were able to kill many people then other potential shooters would be dissuaded.
 
There is no solution but there is a treatment.

MORE GUNS.

If most shooters were confronted and taken out by an armed good guy before they were able to kill many people then other potential shooters would be dissuaded.

Yes. As the guy in the article I quoted said:
That doesn’t mean do nothing. There are all kinds of precautions that can be taken to reduce the carnage caused by mass shootings.

A stronger "gun culture" is one of those precautions.

It's not a solution, though:
[If] you’re trying to find “the cause” or “the answer,” you’re wasting your time.
 
I wonder who his favorite in the Republican primary is ...

Speaking of which, did Mark Sanford ever throw his hat in the ring? Not that he is a viable candidate anymore, the guy can’t help but shoot himself in the feet over and over.

I don't know of any contenders - at least, not any "officially declared" ones. Are there any at all yet? Are there even any serious prospects?

P.S.: Sorry I derailed your thread with the gun-grabber and speech-banner stuff. :o I just couldn't let that guff pass unchallenged - tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito!!
 
Last edited:
Back
Top